Laserfiche WebLink
Description of Alternatives <br />Endangered Fish <br />Research <br />Independent Review Panel(s). The review panel(s) would be comprised <br />of qualified individuals not otherwise participating in the long-term moni- <br />toring and research studies. Responsibilities would include reviewing <br />resource-specific technical studies and providing technical advice. The <br />review panel(s) would be established by the Secretary in consultation with <br />the National Academy of Sciences, the tribes, and other AMWG entities. <br />Further studies of the linkages among endangered fish, their habitat, and <br />Colorado River flows would be undertaken as part of the Adaptive <br />Management Program. Included in these studies would be an initial phase <br />of hypotheses building and risk assessment which could lead to reopening <br />Endangered Species Act consultation with FWS. <br />Humpback Chub <br />Razorback Sucker <br />Endangered fish research flows likely would be <br />between 8,000 and 20,000 cfs with a steady <br />pattern and monthly release volumes during the <br />spring through fall months similar to the <br />Seasonally Adjusted Steady Flow Alternative. <br />The actual flows would be developed by the <br />AMWG through a scientific process. <br />Research may require as many as 5 low-release <br />years (annual release at or near 8.23 maf). Since <br />low water release years are expected to occur <br />only about half the time, it is uncertain how <br />many total years it would take to complete the <br />studies. However, it is likely that research flows <br />could be completed within 10 years. Upon <br />completion of the research flows and analysis of <br />data, Reclamation would implement any <br />necessary changes in operating criteria to <br />comply with the Endangered Species Act. <br />Monitoring and Protecting Cultural Resources <br />The existence and operation of Glen Canyon Dam has had an effect on the <br />historic properties within the Colorado River corridor of Glen and Grand <br />Canyons. These properties include prehistoric and historic archeological <br />sites, along with Native American traditional cultural properties and <br />resources. Impacts are likely to occur to some of these historic properties <br />regardless of the EIS alternative chosen for implementation. <br />The National Historic Preservation Act, as amended in 1992, instructs <br />Federal agencies to develop measures to avoid or minimize loss of historic <br />properties resulting from their actions. Due to potential impacts of any <br />dam operation, Federal agency compliance with sections 110 and 106 of the <br />National Historic Preservation Act will be required. <br />Glen Canyon Dam EIS Summary